2010
DOI: 10.1007/s10530-010-9698-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Recognition of non-native peacock bass, Cichla kelberi by native prey: testing the naiveté hypothesis

Abstract: Prey naiveté is proposed as one of the main reasons behind species extinctions attributed to invasive predators. This study examined whether the naiveté hypothesis could explain extinctions after the introduction of peacock bass (Cichla kelberi) in Paraná River, Brazil. Our results show that prey responded to both visual and chemical cues of peacock bass. Displayed avoidance behaviors were equal to or greater than those observed with a native predator, Hoplias malabaricus. We conclude that lack of recognition … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recent research demonstrates that naive prey do not respond consistently differently to, or suffer higher mortality from, non‐native predators (Rehage, Dunlop & Loftus, 2009; Kovalenko et al. , 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent research demonstrates that naive prey do not respond consistently differently to, or suffer higher mortality from, non‐native predators (Rehage, Dunlop & Loftus, 2009; Kovalenko et al. , 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, prey may recognize predators without prior exposure, what may explain induced habitat shifts in native prey (Galaxias auratus, Stuart-Smith et al, 2008). However, (Kovalenko et al, 2010) showed that prey naiveté might not be an important factor in the invasibility of peacock bass, since native prey could recognize Cichla kelberi as a predator, showing avoidance behavior. However, since prey was collected from the wild, and experiments were conducted in laboratory conditions, it is possible that prey might have previously encountered peacock bass and learned to avoid it, as pointed out by the authors (Kovalenko et al, 2010).…”
Section: Since Neutral Genetic Diversity Appear Unimportant In Cichlamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…in the invasive range (Itaipu hydroelectric reservoir and in the floodplain of the upper Paraná River) together with multiple introductions of Cichla species in the Paraná and Parapanema River basin was also reported (Oliveira et al, 2006). Several aspects of why Cichla's invisibility was so successful in Southeastern Brazil have been investigated, but no correlation with propagule pressure (Espinola et al, 2010) or with the prey naiveté hypothesis (i.e., prey are unable to recognize and respond to predators due to lack of previous ontogenetic contact to a sympatric predator (Kovalenko et al, 2010) have been found. In the latter work, the different co-evolutionary history with a certain predator archetype was not found to explain local extinctions after introduction of C. kelberi.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The expectation is that due to a lack of shared evolutionary history, native prey are likely to have high naïveté to invasive predators (Cox and Lima, 2006). However, where invasive predators produce similar visual and/or chemical cues to native predators, prey can adaptively adjust their behavior and morphology in response to invasive predator presence (Kovalenko et al, 2010). Mothers are already known to alter offspring phenotype, via maternal effects, in direct response to predation pressure and cues of native predator presence (Storm and Lima, 2010); with these changes in offspring phenotype maximizing maternal reproductive success (e.g., Walsh et al, 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%